Herbert Implies Kennedy To Win Leadership
This Article by Chantal Herbert argues that Liberals will choose Gerard Kennedy as the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. They will make that decision by determining which candidate will not only hold the same Liberal seats but gain new ones.
While all the other candidates have their positives. Michael Ignatieff his policy towards Afghanistan and his nation proposal for Quebec. However as we are all aware these pluses are easily translateable into negatives by just going to a different region within Canada.
Bob Rae has the ability to draw NDP support. But he can also lose support be his history as Premier of Ontario.
Stephane Dion, well Chantal is not too friendly. She says he's alienated Quebeckers on one front but has maintained some support from his federalist position. Overall however he doesn't hold more support than Kennedy in the province she even adds that he has the less among the top four.
Gerard Kennedy, however has positives that aren't outweighed by his negative. His negative being his showing in Quebec.
By Chantal Herbert, a noted Quebec journalist, as well as Justin Trudeau, a noted French Speaking Canadian have all said Kennedy has the best chances, it all but eradicates any misgivings towards Gerard Kennedys future support in Quebec.
While all the other candidates have their positives. Michael Ignatieff his policy towards Afghanistan and his nation proposal for Quebec. However as we are all aware these pluses are easily translateable into negatives by just going to a different region within Canada.
Bob Rae has the ability to draw NDP support. But he can also lose support be his history as Premier of Ontario.
Stephane Dion, well Chantal is not too friendly. She says he's alienated Quebeckers on one front but has maintained some support from his federalist position. Overall however he doesn't hold more support than Kennedy in the province she even adds that he has the less among the top four.
Gerard Kennedy, however has positives that aren't outweighed by his negative. His negative being his showing in Quebec.
Of the four, Kennedy is probably the best placed to hang onto the Ontario base of the party. His strong showing in the delegate selection process speaks to that advantage. He also is likely to do well in the parts of Western Canada where the NDP is the main opposition to the Liberals.
Despite his shortcomings in French, Kennedy, like Dion, would likely hang onto the Quebec seats the party currently has. If the Liberals did not lose those ridings last January, the party probably will keep them under any leadership scenario.
By Chantal Herbert, a noted Quebec journalist, as well as Justin Trudeau, a noted French Speaking Canadian have all said Kennedy has the best chances, it all but eradicates any misgivings towards Gerard Kennedys future support in Quebec.
posted by Daniel Mosely at 12:11 PM
4 Comments:
To be frank, isn't Quebec where the Liberals want to improve? Well, i know they want to improve everywhere, but Quebec especially.
With the Tories slumping in Quebec now is not the time for Liberals to be satisfied with 10 MPs from Quebec.
In Ontario he won't change much, and even out west very little is likely to change anyways. So electing Kennedy is a vote for the status quo.
But if Liberals are happy with that, and it isn't like they have much other choice as you pointed out.
Keep in mind, this is the first time that Hebert has ever said anything remotely positive about Kennedy, so these admissions are hardly fluff.
The next paragraph after your quote:
"But beyond that, Kennedy's growth potential in Quebec is non-existent, at least in the short term. Over the campaign, he has failed to make an impression on the province. If he were chosen as leader over three fluently bilingual opponents, many Quebecers would see his victory as a sign that winning their province is not a priority for the Liberals."
Misgivings back?
Chantel Herbert does not explicitly say Kennedy will win or Kennedy is the best or what not, but if you read the article and see the argument it entails it is pretty clear. Please feel free to argue otherwise but point to where I am wrong.
The Article-
With polls showing the party tied with the Conservatives in national voting intentions, electability will ultimately trump other considerations at the upcoming Liberal leadership convention. (Premise 1- She establishes electability is priority in deciding leader)
....
And thus, when Liberal delegates gather in Montreal in two weeks, they will naturally be asking themselves who of Michael Ignatieff, Bob Rae, Gerard Kennedy and Stéphane Dion is the most likely to both hold onto current Liberal territory and offer the party the most potential for victory in the next election.
....
On both scores, Dion comes up trailing his competition. His Quebec prospects are severely limited by his track record on the post-referendum front. In a one-on-one contest with the Bloc Québécois, the Liberal party could always hope to rally the federalist vote, regardless of its leader. Now that the Conservatives are players again in the province, the Liberals can no longer bank on being the default federalist option. (Premise 2- Dion is behind Kennedy in Quebec and Ontario)
....
Of the four, Kennedy is probably the best placed to hang onto the Ontario base of the party. His strong showing in the delegate selection process speaks to that advantage. He also is likely to do well in the parts of Western Canada where the NDP is the main opposition to the Liberals. (Premise 3- Kennedy is the best to hold onto Ontario)
Despite his shortcomings in French, Kennedy, like Dion, would likely hang onto the Quebec seats the party currently has. If the Liberals did not lose those ridings last January, the party probably will keep them under any leadership scenario. (Premise 4- Kennedy will hold onto Quebec)
But beyond that, Kennedy's growth potential in Quebec is non-existent, at least in the short term. Over the campaign, he has failed to make an impression on the province. If he were chosen as leader over three fluently bilingual opponents, many Quebecers would see his victory as a sign that winning their province is not a priority for the Liberals. (This is not that negative, as Dion was trailing Kennedy so Dion is even worse situated)
For different reasons, Rae and Ignatieff both have potential to increase the party's support in Quebec. At a minimum, either could realistically hope to recoup the federalist seats the party lost in the January election.
Rae's New Democrat credentials play well with the progressive voters the party needs to become a force in Quebec again.
Elsewhere in Canada, Rae could also attract a share of the NDP vote. But his record as a failed premier could also lose the party support. With an economic downturn on the horizon, some Ontario voters would be bound to have second thoughts about going into another uncertain economic period with Rae at the helm. (Premise 5- Rae loses support)
Ignatieff remains a wild card. His support for the extension of the Afghan mission could win him votes on the right; his suggestion of a carbon tax on greenhouse gas emissions could attract votes on the left; his openness to the recognition of Quebec as a nation could open doors in francophone Quebec. All three could also lose the party support in crucial areas of the country. (Premise 6- Ignatieff loses support)
So let's look at this argument, starting with premise 1
1.electability will ultimately trump other considerations at the upcoming Liberal leadership convention.
2. Dion is behind Kennedy in Ontario and Quebec.
3. Kennedy best to hold onto Ontario.
4. Kennedy will hold onto seats on Quebec
5. Rae will lose seats
6. Ignatieff will lose seats.
7. Conclusion Kennedy has the most electability
The way I see it is Herbert gives solid affirmations for Kennedy, that he'll hold onto Quebec and be the best in Ontario. While she says the other have pluses and negatives that leave their electability in doubt if not negligable.
You call this spin?
I call it a logical conclusion implied from her premises.
Post a Comment
<< Home